M. Gandhi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirteenth day of November Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.15175 of 2017 M.GANDHI ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 Vs THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE THILAGAR THIDAL POLICE STATION,(CRIME), MADURAI CITY CR NO.1038 OF 2017. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.N.MADHAVA GOVINDAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Intervenor : MR.VIJAYARAJA Advocate PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 420, 419,467, 471, 472, 294(b), 506(i) of I.P.C in Crime No. 1038 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused joined together and created bogus records in respect of the property belongs to the defacto complainant and thereby, they registered a sale deed agreement in favour of one Balasubramanian. After receiving from Mayandi, the defacto complainant found the fraudulent act committed by the petitioner and his son and other accused. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged a complainant before the respondent police. The petitioner's son was arrested and remanded to judicial custody and has given confession statement. From his confession statement, the petitioner is arrayed as A1 for the above said offences.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the State submitted that there are four previous case pending against the petitioner, out of which one is C.B.I Case and others are registered by the Law Enforcing Agency and he further submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender in land acquisition and he vehemently opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that there are four previous cases as against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 13/11/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THILAGAR THIDAL POLICE STATION, (CRIME), MADURAI CITY.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.15175 of 2017 Date :13/11/2017 MKV-PM-PN-SAR 3/23.11.2017/2P-3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/